hoisve@utah-cs.UUCP (David T Hoisve) (01/21/88)
We are very interested in gatewaying our Novell PC networks to a
TCP/IP Ethernet.
One unique approach to this problem would be using a PC as a
level-3 gateway between the Novell IPX net and the IP Ethernet.
Client programs (such as NCSA telnet, Phil Karn's NET package, X
windows programs, etc.) would be modified to encapsulate the IP
packets in IPX packets. The gateway would catch the IPX packets
from the clients, strip the IPX headers, and send them out over
the Ethernet.
I would greatly appreciate information on any current or planned
development efforts in this area.
Thanks,
Dave Hoisve.
University of Utah Computer Center
HOISVE@CC.UTAH.EDU
HOISVE@UTAHCCA.BITNET
{ihnp4,hplabs,decvax}!utah-cs!hoisve jbvb@ftp.UUCP (James Van Bokkelen) (01/24/88)
There are presently two commercial solutions to this problem, neither being what you describe: One uses the file server as a translating gateway between IPX and TCP/IP. The other shares the workstation's network interface between IPX and TCP/IP. I would only recommend using the file server as a gateway if you have some kind of incompatible network running the Novell software (ArcNet, Omninet, whatever). In this case, Novell and Interlan already have a product that installs in the server, and software for the workstation. If they have published the specs for the IPX side, I haven't heard about it, so you probably can't roll your own. I know it uses Novell IPX protocols from the workstation to the server, where translation to TCP takes place. If you have Ethernet, or ProNET-10 token ring, you get much better throughput if you just put a bridge between the Novell network and the TCP/IP network, and install one of the TCP/IP software products that co-exists with Netware on the workstation. Univation, Sytek, Proteon, Interlan, BICC Data Networks and Schneider & Koch all supply versions of PC/TCP that co-exist with Netware (there's even software now that we don't supply, from Excelan). With the TCP/IP on the workstation, sharing a single network card with Netware, you can use FTP to get or put files from a TCP/IP host to the Novell file server's disk at 30 or 40 Kbytes/sec. Of course, this may cost somewhat more than a server-based approach, but you get higher transfer rates and no impact on other users of the server. The approach of building a level-3 gateway would work, but it will require that ARP and IP be installed on top of IPX, and the gateway needs to be as smart as a gateway usually is... James VanBokkelen FTP Software Inc.
ROBERT@MCGILL1.BITNET (Robert Craig) (01/24/88)
========================================================================
Received: from ADMIN.BYU.EDU by MCGILL.NETNORTH.CA (Mailer X1.24) with BSMTP id
7289; Sat, 23 Jan 88 14:29:47 EST
Received: by BYUADMIN (Mailer X1.25) id 3284; Sat, 23 Jan 88 12:22:52 MST
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 88 00:00:00 GMT
Reply-To: pcip@udel.edu
Sender: "(PC-IP Arpa Discussions)" <PCIP-L@BYUADMIN>
Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was pcip-request@louie.udel.edu
From: David T Hoisve <hoisve@cs.utah.edu>
Subject: TCP/Novell gateway
X-To: pcip@louie.udel.edu
To: Robert Craig <ROBERT@MCGILL1>
We are very interested in gatewaying our Novell PC networks to a
TCP/IP Ethernet.
One unique approach to this problem would be using a PC as a
level-3 gateway between the Novell IPX net and the IP Ethernet.
Client programs (such as NCSA telnet, Phil Karn's NET package, X
windows programs, etc.) would be modified to encapsulate the IP
packets in IPX packets. The gateway would catch the IPX packets
from the clients, strip the IPX headers, and send them out over
the Ethernet.
I would greatly appreciate information on any current or planned
development efforts in this area.
Thanks,
Dave Hoisve.
University of Utah Computer Center
HOISVE@CC.UTAH.EDU
HOISVE@UTAHCCA.BITNET
{ihnp4,hplabs,decvax}!utah-cs!hoisve
PCIP-L BYUADMIN 1/23/88
David T Hoisve Robert Craig 1/21/88 TCP/Novell gatewayROBERT@MCGILL1.BITNET (Robert Craig) (01/24/88)
Sorry about the earlier "empty" reply to this message, my fingers got away from me. >We are very interested in gatewaying our Novell PC networks to a >TCP/IP Ethernet. > >One unique approach to this problem would be using a PC as a >level-3 gateway between the Novell IPX net and the IP Ethernet. >Client programs (such as NCSA telnet, Phil Karn's NET package, X >windows programs, etc.) would be modified to encapsulate the IP >packets in IPX packets. The gateway would catch the IPX packets >from the clients, strip the IPX headers, and send them out over >the Ethernet. If you're going to use a PC anyway to connect the two networks and act as a gateway, you don't need to do the encapsulation. The two protocols will coexist quite nicely on the same physical network. The only ugly part is that getting NetWare and whatever TCP/IP product you use to share the same network interface is unlikely at best, so you either boot up with the NetWare shell OR with TCP/IP... I suppose one could arbitrate usage of the single interface, but it would be tricky. If you're dead set on the idea of encapsulation, then why bother with the gateway PC? Just encapsulate the IP packets in IPX and pass them through the NetWare bridge to a machine on the backbone ethernet which strips the encapsulation and forwards as appropriate. Don't forget that this machine will have to understand BOTH routing protocols! Or write a NetWare Value Added Process which carries out this function in the file server (bridge) itself. I considered this approach briefly in a moment of insanity. It would mean convincing the bridge to pass packets it didn't understand on to your process so that you could fix them up. It would also mean some rather tricksy coding in a box that one would like to be REAL reliable. If you're going to put the function in the file server, you're probably further ahead to make the VAP talk to another network interface (connected to the same netware network) over which it has exclusive control. This would also allow the use of TCP/IP, rather than this clumsy encapsulation of IP in IPX. This is, I believe, the approach taken by Micom/Interlan and also by what's-their-names. Robert Craig McGill University Computing Centre
PAP4@AI.AI.MIT.EDU ("Philip A. Prindeville") (01/25/88)
The two protocols will coexist quite nicely on the same
physical network. The only ugly part is that getting
NetWare and whatever TCP/IP product you use to share the
same network interface is unlikely at best, so you either
boot up with the NetWare shell OR with TCP/IP...
I suppose one could arbitrate usage of the single interface,
but it would be tricky.
Not so! John Romkey of FTP Software, Inc. proposed a standard
datalink level access method for applications to send and
receive MAC level packets over various network interfaces. The
technique was generic enough to support ethernet, pronet, token
ring (any link level protocol that identifies the above
protocol in a standard way, i.e. packets containing a type field).
Several groups had expressed interest in having Netware co-reside
with another protocol suite (often TCP/IP), and as a result
Novell now supports this 'standard'. Note that it is not quite
as fast as running directly on top of the interface, but then the
interoperability might be more important.
James VanBokkolen posted a copy of this to PCIP last October 18 or
there abouts, so check the archives.
-Philipamit@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu (Neta Amit) (01/26/88)
> We are very interested in gatewaying our Novell PC networks to a > TCP/IP Ethernet. > > One unique approach to this problem would be using a PC as a > level-3 gateway between the Novell IPX net and the IP Ethernet. > Client programs (such as NCSA telnet, Phil Karn's NET package, X > windows programs, etc.) would be modified to encapsulate the IP > packets in IPX packets. The gateway would catch the IPX packets > from the clients, strip the IPX headers, and send them out over > the Ethernet. > Speaking of which: we've been engaged in a similar project to gateway between a IBM PC-LAN network (in fact: any NetBIOS-based LAN) and the Internet. One of the PC's serves as a gateway, and contains cards for both networks. The rest are connected just to the PC-LAN. The first version supported Mail services, and was implemented by mapping SMTP to the PC-LAN equivalent. It has been operational for about a year. In the second version, currently under construction, IP packets are encapsulated by the local packets. SMTP, FTP and Telnet will be supported. Our goal is to build a full-service facility, including most servers. For example, the Mail server and client are not dependent on external facilities (hosts, protocols); the mail server is (almost) running as a TSR, along with PC-LAN Program and DOS. Like many others, we base our code on MIT's/CMU's Pcip package -- with substantial mods. Two questions to Netlanders: - where can we find pcip-FTP sources? Our outdated version doesn't include it. - 3Com's Etherlink card is expensive and slow -- but supported by pcip. We'd like to hear about availability of drivers for more modern cards, particulary WD. Alternatively, we're thinking about modifying one of the existing public domain drivers. It doesn't look too bad; is it ? TIA, -- Neta Amit U of Minnesota CSci Arpanet: amit@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu
jbvb@ftp.UUCP (James Van Bokkelen) (01/27/88)
[] Disclaimer - I have a vested interest in what I'm writing about!
Of course, so did/do I.
......
But a gateway works on all types of subnets, and on a flat network
provides security by forcing a gateway user to log in to Netware before
accessing TCP hosts. Also, a gateway only takes up 1 IP address, while
each workstation is it's own TCP host.
......
Larry Backman
Micom - Interlan
This is my personal opinion: I think that the days of "one media/protocol
over here, another over there, and we'll put a translating gateway between
them when we need one" are numbered, if not already past. Were I advising
someone who didn't already have an investment in incompatible hardware, I'd
tell them to use all Ethernet, or all ProNET-10, or all 802.5, or at least
a mix of Ether and Starlan (for which TCP/IP and MAC-level bridges to
interconnect the two speeds are already available). Ethernet happens to
be the media available on the widest range of machines, by a large margin,
so that's why I mention it first. Starlan has identical packet formats...
The issue of IP addresses for workstations is a real one, but the process
of making configuration automatic upon power-up is relatively well-understood.
I'd expect it to be addressed by at least one commercial supplier sometime
during 1988.
James VanBokkelen
FTP Software Inc.bertrand@cui.UUCP (IBRAHIM Bertrand) (01/29/88)
Novell is marketing such a product. Even though there seems to be an implantation running under Netware 286 v2.0a, the only commercially available implementation seems to be running under SFT Netware 286 v2.1 (Part No 02-005-01). The physical link is on the server and enables up to 16 workstations to connect simultaneously to the TCP world. The kit includes an NP600A Ethernet controller, the gateway software and the documentation. There is also a short pamphlet describing the Netware TCP/IP option (document 420-010270-001 June 87). I haven't got any chance yet to try this gateway, so I cannot give any information on speed or reliability. Another commercial source is ISOLAN (BICC data networks). They sell an ISOLAN multi-protocol IEEE 802.3 ethernet support for the PC. It allows you to connect your PC to a Novell server and to the TCP world simultaneously. This is not a real gateway (as far as I can tell). The ISOLAN controller with multi-protocol handler sofware is Part No 4113-0, the Novell drivers are Part No 4116-x (x depends on what version of Netware your server is running). Hope this helps, Bertrand Ibrahim. ( usual disclaimer: ... :-)
romkey@kaos.UUCP (John Romkey) (01/29/88)
In article <3695@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu> amit@umn-cs.UUCP (Neta Amit) writes: >Like many others, we base our code on MIT's/CMU's Pcip package -- with >substantial mods. Two questions to Netlanders: >- where can we find pcip-FTP sources? Our outdated version doesn't > include it. FTP was never included as a part of either the MIT or CMU PC/IP. There haven't been any major changes to the public domain code for several years. The last major changes that I can remember were SLIP being added to the CMU release, and I can't even remember if that really happened or if my memory is playing tricks on me. Stanford and the commercial sellers of PC/IP-based software (FTP Software, Wollongong, IBM) have added FTP to PC/IP. >- 3Com's Etherlink card is expensive and slow -- but supported by pcip. > We'd like to hear about availability of drivers for more modern cards, > particulary WD. Alternatively, we're thinking about modifying one of the > existing public domain drivers. It doesn't look too bad; is it ? Newer cards like the Western Digital WD8003 and Micom-Interlan NI5210 run much faster than the 3C501 *and* tend to be lower priced. It won't be too easy to modify the old 3C501 driver to work with these cards, though, as the ethernet controller chips on the cards are completely different from the 3C501's. I don't know of any public domain drivers, but often the manufacturers have a simple driver they can supply you with. -- - john romkey ...harvard!spdcc!kaos!romkey romkey@kaos.uucp romkey@xx.lcs.mit.edu